Netherlands
ID checks to be introducedIn future police will be authorized
to require anyone in the Netherlands older than 12 to show proof
of his or her identity. Failure to do so can result in a prison
sentence of up to two months or a fine of up to 2,250 Euro. Police
will be given powers to request proof of identity for the purpose
of carrying out all their regular tasks, specifically the investigation
of criminal offences, maintenance of public order, and providing
assistance. Those responsible for carrying out administrative
supervision will also be given the same powers, in order to improve
law enforcement.

Thus, the new requirement will not be confined merely to criminal
suspects. These are the main points of a Bill proposing a broadened
identification requirement. Mr J P H Donner, Minister of Justice,
has submitted the bill for the advice of various bodies including
the Data Protection Board, the Public Prosecution Service, the
Council of Police Commissioners, the Council for the Judiciary,
the Netherlands Association for the Judiciary (NVVR), the Netherlands
Bar Association (Nova), and the Association of Netherlands Municipalities.

The Strategic Accord 2002 stated that a general identification
requirement would be implemented in order to combat crime and
to increase the effectiveness of law enforcement. The bill is
a detailed version of proposals subsequently laid down in the
National Safety Plan.

Current legislation allows police to request ID from a person
stopped, or a suspect who has been arrested. If the suspect refuses,
or if the police have reason to believe that he has given a false
name, then the person may be arrested so that measures can be
taken for establishing his identity (photographs, fingerprints
etc.). The suspect can also be held for interrogation for a period
not exceeding twice six hours. The police currently have no powers
to demand proof of identity in performing its regular police
tasks, such as maintenance of public order and providing assistance.

Aside from these tasks, the police have a number of special supervisory
tasks, defined by the Police Act. Examples are traffic supervision,
whereby Road Traffic Regulations allow the police to ask to see
a person's driving licence. Also, in the case of alien supervision,
the Aliens Act 2000 grants the police powers to request ID as
well as proof of residence status in the event that a reasonable
suspicion exists of illegal residence. The new bill proposes
no changes in these two areas.

In addition to the police, current law also empowers, and sometimes
even obliges, a number of other bodies to request ID in cases
described in the statutes. One example is banks, which may request
it for opening an account. Civil-law notaries may also require
ID, and it must also be furnished with any application for a
tax and social insurance number etc. All this will also remain
unchanged.

The present bill introduces major additions to the current identification
requirement. The future legal requirement contains an obligation
to show ID, entailing the obligation to carry valid ID at all
times.

The General Administrative Law Act will also include an obligation
to prove identity in order to enable the implementation of administrative
supervision in the various statutes involved. The obligation
can be met by using currently recognized identity documents.
This means that no new ones are to be proposed. In requesting
ID, police and administrative supervisors will be bound to the
criterion establishing the reasonable exercise of duties. This
means that there must always be a reason for performing identity
checks, in other words that they are not carried out randomly,
but that the powers to do so shall be exercised for the purpose
of improving law enforcement.